> I think we're in pretty good shape as far as the document reflecting
> library-contetns.scm is concerned. I have the attached changes.
> Anton: could you regenerate the other stuff based on this and check in?
Done. I've also duplicated member, memq, memv, memp, assoc, assq, assv,
and assp from (r6rs lists) into (r6rs base). I left remove, remp, remq,
and remv in (r6rs lists) only, because 'remove' is also in SRFI 1.
If anyone was expecting a different partitioning, let me know. I could
see removing member, memq, memv, memp, assoc, assq, assv, and assp from
(r6rs lists), but my recollection is that we decided to duplicate them.
> I have a tiny change request: We generally use the plural for library
> names based on types: "hash-tables," "ports," and so on. Shouldn't we
> do the same for "fixnum" and "flonum"? (I know, "fx," ... I don't
> care.)
I don't care about fx or fl either, but to me this change seems
inconsistent with the 'exact' and 'inexact' libraries. Although those
may not be "types", it seems strange to have one library named (r6rs
arithmetic exact) and another named (r6rs arithmetic fixnums).
Anyone else want to chime in on this weighty issue? (Perhaps this is
related to whether one abbreviates mathematics as "Math" (American) or
"Maths" (European?)...)
Anton